REPORTS 


ON 


ADDITIONAL  WATER  SUPPLY 


FOR  THE 

CITY  OF  HARTFORD. 


HARTFORD  : 

/ 

PRESS  OF  CASE,  LOCKWOOD  AND  COMPANY. 

1862. 


gm,  fO*  (S  / 

**  k a , U 

(J  V Li  i ^ 

Ut5* 


REPORT. 


Office  Water  Commissioners,  ) 
Hartford,  March  8th,  1862.  ) 

To  the  Honorable  the  Mayor  and  Court  of  Common  Coun- 
cil of  the  City  of  Hartford : 

Gentlemen, — At  a meeting  of  your  honorable  body,  held 
May  27th,  1861,  the  following  vote  was  passed  by  concur- 
rent action : 

Voted , “ That  the  reports  and  papers  relating  to  an  addi- 
tional supply  of  water  for  the  city,  be  referred  to  the  Board 
of  Water  Commissioners,  with  power  to  employ  such  assist- 
ance as  may  be  needed  to  re-examine  and  report  anew  on 
the  various  projects  for  furnishing  the  city  with  an  addi- 
tional supply  of  water.” 

This  Board,  fully  appreciating  the  importance  of  a sub- 
ject so  vital  to  the  interests  of  the  city  as  its  water  supply, 
respectfully  beg  leave  to  report,  that  in  accordance  with 
the  foregoing  vote,  and  with  a view  to  elicit  information  of 
a reliable  character,  they  employed  Prof.  B.  Silliman,  Jr., 
Analytical  Chemist,  to  examine  the  waters  of  Trout  Brook, 
at  West  Hartford,  and  report  as  to  their  chemical  and 
physical  properties,  and  the  adequacy  of  the  supply  from 
that  source.  His  very  able  report,  in  detail,  we  herewith 
submit  and  recommend  the  same  to  your  careful  consider- 
ation. 

The  Board  also  employed  McRee  Swift,  Esq.,  civil  engi- 


4 


neer,  whose  large  experience  in  the  construction  of  water- 
works has  eminently  qualified  him  for  the  duties  required. 

He  was  instructed  to  examine  the  whole  subject  of  our 
present  and  prospective  wants,  relative  to  a water  supply, 
and  report  on  what,  in  his  opinion,  would  be  the  most 
reliable,  economical  and  best  plan  for  obtaining  such  addi- 
tional supply.  This  service  Mr.  Swift  has  performed,  and 
his  able  report  is  herewith  submitted  to  your  honorable 
body.  It  will  be  observed  by  reference  to  this  report  that 
Mr.  Swift  estimates  on  two  plans,  one  by  pumping,  and 
one  by  gravitation,  and  recommends  the  latter  for  adoption. 

By  reference  to  Prof.  Silliman’s  report,  it  will  be  found 
that  the  water  from  the  proposed  source  at  West  Hartford, 
is  of  a very  pure  quality,  and  that  no  fears  need  be  enter- 
tained as  to  any  unfavorable  effect  of  storing  the  same  in 
reservoirs. 

In  regard  to  our  present  condition,  relative  to  the  ef- 
fectual head  upon  which  the  city  is  now  dependent  for  its 
water  supply,  actual  experiment  has  verified  the  fact,  that 
at  present  rate  of  consumption,  the  Ordinary  draught 
during  the  day,  upon  the  distributing  pipes,  reduces  the 
effectual  head  about  fourteen  feet. 

The  whole  loss  of  the  effectual  head  may  be  thus  stated : 

Average  depression  below  full  head  in  reservoir,  2 feet. 

Loss  by  distributing  draft  as  above,  . 14  “ 

Height  of  faucets  on  first  floors  above  road  bed,  8 “ 

Total  loss  or  difference  between  apparent  and 

effective  head,  ...  24  feet. 

The  following  statement  shows  the  actual  and  effective 
head  as  it  exists  at  various  points  in  the  city : 

Effective 
. , , , , head  on 

Actual  head  flrst  floor 
with  a full  as  it  ordi_ 
reservoir.  narily  ex- 
ists. 

At  road  bed  on  Main  street  near  Trumbull  street,  52  feet.  28  feet. 


u 

“ in  front  of  State  House, 

66  “ 

42 

u 

it 

“ in  front  of  South  Church, 

73  “ 

49 

u 

u 

“ at  Canton  street, 

44  “ 

20 

5 


At  road  bed  on  Main  st.  at  Arsenal  Gate,  41  feet.  17  feet. 


« 

~ — 

“ “ Suffield  street, 

38 

u 

14 

kt 

tt 

“ Washington  st.,  cor.  Buckingham, 

43 

u 

19 

tt 

tt 

“ “ cor.  Jefferson  st., 

36 

a 

12 

a 

it 

“ “ Hydrant  in  front 

of  Retreat  Gate, 

12 

“ 

0 

it 

At  road  bed  on  Washington  st.  at  New  Britain  and 

♦Webster  st. 

16 

u 

0 

u 

At  road  bed  on  New  Britain  av.  in  front  of  J.  S ey- 

mour’s  road, 

12 

u 

0 

“ 

At  road  bed  on  New  Britain  av.  in  front  of  H. 

Seymour’s  late  residence, 

5 

a 

0 

n 

At  road  bed  on  Webster  st.  in  front  of  Edwin 

Merritt’s  house, 

22 

it 

0 

tt 

At  road  bed  on  Webster  st.  at  junction  with  Ma- 

pie  avenue, 

39 

u 

15 

tt 

At  road  bed  on  Vernon  st.  cor.  of  Washington, 

18 

a 

0 

u 

tt 

“ M at  road  in  front  of  John 

Allen’s  house, 

15 

it 

0 

a 

At  road  bed  on  Baker  st.  at  hydrant  corner  of 

Wolcott  st., 

49 

tt 

25 

a 

At  road  bed  on  Baker  st.  at  cor.  Linden  st., 

42 

tt 

18 

tt 

tt 

“ “ Affleck  st., 

34 

a 

10 

tt 

tt 

“ “ Putnam  st., 

22 

u 

0 

u 

it 

“ “ Zion  st., 

20 

tt 

0 

n 

tt 

“ Park  street,  u 

27 

tt 

3 

tt 

tt 

“ “ Affleck  st., 

45 

tt 

21 

u 

tt 

“ Retreat  av.  at  Retreat  Gate, 

50 

u 

26 

tt 

tt 

u Capen  st.,  cor.  of  Clark  st., 

30 

tt 

6 

n 

it 

Clark  st.,  in  front  of  Peckham’s 

house,  .... 

32 

tt 

8 

a 

At  road  bed  on  Clark  st.  at  Westland  st., 

27 

tt 

3 

a 

a 

“ Albany  av.  at  Center  st., 

65 

tt 

41 

u 

tt 

u “ Kenyon’s  House, 

63 

“ 

39 

a 

tt 

“ Maple  av.  at  Gate  at  the  Retreat 

Grounds,  .... 

46 

it 

22 

tt 

At  road  bed  on  Maple  av.  at  junction  of  Webster,  39 

tt 

15 

u 

6 


The  annual  increase  of  the  consumption  of  water,  and 
the  corresponding  increase  of  engine  duty,  is  shown  by 
the  following  table  : 


Running 

o 

02 

1 £ 

I 9 

g-g'S? 

T3 

J.9 

bS  • 

time. 

to  • 

o 

9 « 

► 

T?  CD  _C3  •! 

*§  g £ 

Year. 

Hours. 

Min. 

H.S  * 

rfJ  SCO 

|1  g 

Total  poi 

of  Coal 

consume 

Gallons  c 

Water  d< 

ed  into  tl 

Reservoii 

© £3  © CG 

• ® w rt  a 

s 

► s Z g 

< © .9  <2  o 

Av.  No.  < 

Gals,  com 

each  day 

the  year. 

# 

• £ ® ^ 
© O 

«l  £ S- 
> d © $ 

•<©.S 

10  months 
for  1856. 
12  months 

1,291 

690,228 

232,944 

104,914,656 

450 

345,114 

for  1857. 
12  months 

2,169 

1,248,762 

376,900 

190,456,203 

505 

521,797 

176,683 

for  1858. 
12  months 

2,718 

50 

1,589,211 

489,024 

242,354,674 

495 

661,245 

139,448 

for  1859. 
12  months 

3,205 

35 

1,879,663 

582,375 

286,648,604 

492 

785,338 

124,093 

for  1860. 
12  months 

3.577 

11 

2,147,004 

683,200 

327,417,801 

479 

897,035 

111,697 

for  1861. 

4,429 

30 

2,630,035 

777,928 

401,080.335 

515 

1,098,850 

201.825 

The  imperative  necessity  of  providing  for  an  additional 
supply  of  water  from  some  source,  and  at  an  additional 
elevation  of  reservoir  head,  sufficient  to  meet  the  growing 
demands  of  the  higher  portions  of  our  city  ; and  the  dan- 
ger of  accidents  to  the  present  machinery,  upon  which  our 
supply  of  this  indispensable  element  of  existence  so  entire- 
ly depends,  have  long  protruded  themselves  with  such 
painful  earnestness  upon  the  Board  of  Water  Commission- 
ers, that  they  have  frequently  solicited  the  attention  of  the 
council  to  the  subject. 

The  opinion  which  they  have  heretofore,  and  uniformly 
expressed,  in  favor  of  meeting  these  additional  wants,  by 
a supply  by  gravitation  from  Trout  Brook,  so  called,  in 
West  Hartford,  was  not  a mere  theoretical  or  speculative 
opinion,  loosely  formed,  but  was  the  result  of  patient  and 
careful  investigation  of  the  whole  subject — and  neither  a 
single  member  of  the  present,  nor  any  past  Board,  who 
has  participated  in  those  investigations,  has  ever  come  to 
any  different  result,  or  has  hesitated  in  giving  this  the 
preference  over  every  other  plan  proposed. 

The  Board  therefore,  in  cordially  indorsing,  as  they  do, 
the  mode  of  supply  recommended  in  the  accompanying 


reports,  from  gentlemen  of  great  professional  skill  and 
science,  and  eminent  as  adepts  on  such  matters,  only  reit- 
erate their  former  convictions  upon  this  subject. 


Respectfully  submitted, 


HIRAM  BISSELL, 
E.  D.  TIFFANY, 
SETH  E.  MARSH, 
N.  H.  MORGAN, 
D.  CRARY, 


PROF.  SILLIMAN’S 


REPORT 


ON  THE 


WATER  SUPPLY 


HERTFORD. 


HARTFORD: 

PRESS  OF  CASE,  LOCKWOOD  AND  COMPANY. 

1861. 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign  Alternates 


https://archive.org/details/reportsonadditioOOhart 


CONTENTS. 


Page. 


Address  to  the  Commissioners,  ....  5 

Sources  of  Auxiliary  Supply,  ....  5 

Flow  of  Water,  .....  6 

Estimate  of  Flow  from  Rain  Fall,  ....  7 

Purity  of  Waters — Physical  Properties — A.  Color,  . 9 

B.  Transparency — C.  Taste — D.  Smell,  . . 10 

Chemical  Examination  of  the  Waters,  . . .11 

Comparative  Purity  and  Hardness  of  several  Waters,  . 12 

Comparison  of  these  results  with  the  Analysis  of  several 

Well  Waters  from  Hartford,  . . . .14 

Comparative  Hardness  of  Waters,  . . . 15 

Action  of  the  Waters  on  Lead,  . . . .17 

Acid  or  Alkaline  Condition  of  the  Waters,  . . 18 

The  Probable  Effects  of  Storing  the  Waters  of  Trout  Brook,  19 
Cause  of  Annoyance  at  New  Britain,  . . . 19 

Good  Success  of  Storing  at  Brooklyn,  . . .20 

What  Precautions  should  be  taken  to  Secure  the  Best  Possi- 
ble Quality  of  Water  for  a City  Supply,  . . 21 

Filtration — Difference  between  Spring  and  Rain  Water — 

Aeration,  . . . . . .22 

Structure  of  Filters,  . . . . • 23 


REPORT. 


To  the  Board  of  Water  Commissioners  of  the  City  of 
Hartford: 

Gentlemen  : 

At  your  request  I have  examined  the  sources  of  water 
supply  in  West  Hartford,  which  are  under  consideration  as 
an  auxiliary  source  for  the  city  of  Hartford.  The  samples 
collected  by  me,  both  from  the  stream  in  question  and  from 
the  Connecticut,  have  been  chemically  examined,  and  I 
now  present  for  your  consideration  the  following 

REPORT. 

SOURCES. 

The  source  from  which  it  is  proposed  to  draw  the  addi- 
tional water  supply  is  the  valley  of  a small  rivulet  called 
Trout  Brook,  in  West  Hartford.  The  region  drained  by 
this  stream  and  its  branches  is  a part  of  the  general  water 
shed  of  the  Connecticut.  The  soil  is  derived  from  the 
spoils  of  the  red  shales  and  trap  rocks  forming  the  Talcott 
mountain  range  and  its  subordinate  hills.  The  red  sand- 
stone of  this  part  of  the  valley  is  a soft,  rather  fine  grained 
shale,  not  particularly  argillaceous  or  calcareous.  The 
gravel  and  loose  materials  of  the  surface  are  clean  and 
fitted  to  form  embankments. 

A part  of  the  valley  of  Trout  Brook,  especially  along 
the  bottoms  of  the  streams,  is  now  covered  by  a dense 
undergrowth  of  trees  and  shrubs,  giving  shelter  to  aquatic 


« 


1 


6 

and  bog  frequenting  plants,  whose  roots  and  decaying  leaves 
or  stems  color  the  water  somewhat  with  vegetable  matter, 
as  is  the  case  almost  universally  in  streams  of  soft  water. 
The  clearing  away  of  the  causes  of  this  coloration  will 
diminish  or  entirely  remove  these  effects. 

At  the  margin  of  what  may  be  called  the  swampy  bot- 
toms of  this  stream,  is  found  in  several  places  and  for  a 
considerable  distance,  the  out  crop  of  a soft  shale,  on  the 
edges  of  which  numerous  springs  of  clear,  sparkling  water 
are  found.  These  now  lose  themselves,  for  the  most  part,  in 
wet,  boggy  land ; but  wherever,  for  farm  purposes,  an  exca- 
vation has  been  made  on  this  line,  beautiful  perennial 
springs  are  produced.  The  water  from  these  sources  was 
separately  examined.*  It  is  what  is  commonly  called  “ pure 
spring  water,”  and  forms  a valuable  item  in  the  supply  to 
be  stored. 

The  main  stream  divides  into  two  branches  not  far  from 
where  it  is  proposed  to  construct  the  dam, — the  left 
branch  coming  from  the  north,  while  the  right  branch  flows 
down  from  the  western  hills.  The  ground  on  both  these 
streams  is  favorable  for  storing  water  in  reservoirs,  sup- 
plemental to  the  larger  one  on  the  main  stream. 

The  chemical  examinations,  presently  to  be  detailed, 
show  .that  in  the  qualities  required  in  a source  of  supply 
for  a large  town,  the  waters  of  this  stream  are  all  that  can 
be  desired. 

FLOW  OF  WATER. 

On  the  11th  of  June,  I estimated  the  flow  of  this  stream 
as  about  six  millions  of  gallons  for  the  twenty-four  hours. 
On  the  16th  of  July,  after  an  almost  uninterrupted  drouth 
of  six  weeks,  this  flow  had  diminished  ten  fold,  or  to 
about  six  hundred  thousand  gallons.  I leave  it  for  your 
Engineer  to  show,  from  frequent  and  long  continued  observa- 
tions, what  he  considers  the  average  flow  for  the  whole  year. 


* See  No.  3 of  the  Analyses,  p.  1 1 » 


7 


I would  simply  remark  in  passing,  that  experience  shows 
in  similar  cases,  when  a brook  flows  over  a clean  pebbly  bot- 
tom, that  the  attempt  to  gauge  it  by  a board  dam  always 
gives  a less  amount  than  the  actual  flow,  from  the  impossi- 
bility of  preventing  leakage  through  the  porous  bottom  of 
the  stream  itself ; so  that  the  results  obtained  by  ponding 
or  storing  are  liable  to  exceed  the  calculations  based  on 
gauging. 

ESTIMATE  OF  THE  FLOW  FROM  THE  RAIN  FALL. 

A little  calculation  from  well  established  data  will  show 
what  the  storage  capacity  of  the  stream  is,  and  you  can 
determine  from  other  sources  how  nearly  this  result  cor- 
responds with  the  truth. 

I estimate  that  Trout  Brook  represents,  at  the  point 
where  the  main  reservoir  is  to  be  established,  the  drainage 
of  not  less  than  ten  square  miles  of  surface.  As  the 
springs  and  streams  of  a limited  district  like  this  represent 
in  their  aggregate  only  the  annual  rain  fall  of  the  district — 
less  the  amounts  lost  in  evaporation  and  soakage — it  fol- 
lows that  we  have  in  a given  case  the  elements  of  a calcula- 
tion, which  will  show  pretty  closely  the  available  water- 
producing  capacity  of  the  district. 

From  a long  series  of  Meteorological  Observations  made 
for  many  years  at  New  Haven,  by  the  Connecticut  Academy 
of  Arts  and  Sciences,  it  appears  that  the  average  annual 
rain-fall  of  this  place  is  about  forty-four  inches.  It  can  not 
be  much  different  in  the  vicinity  of  Hartford. 

Hydraulic  engineers  agree,  I believe,  in  estimating  the 
available  amount  of  water  in  a river  valley  as  equal  to 
about  half  the  aggregate  rain-fall.  It  is  sometimes  stated 
as  low  as  four-tenths  of  this  quantity.  Let  us  employ  the 
smaller  number  in  this  estimate. 

On  each  superficial  acre  of  ground  are  43,560  square 
feet,  on  which  a rain-fall  of  forty-four  inches  annually  pre- 
cipitafes  an  aggregate  of  very  nearly  160,000  cubic  feet  of 


8 


water,  (159,480  exactly.)  This  is  equal  to  10,000,000 
pounds,  a cubic  foot  of  water  weighing  62.5  pounds.  As 
the  imperial  gallon  holds  ten  pounds  of  water,  this  weight 
corresponds  to  1,000,000  gallons.  Assuming  that  four- 
tenths  of  this  quantity  may  be  stored,  we  have  an  available 
storage  per  acre  of  400,000  gallons.  Each  square  mile  (640 
acres)  of  water  shed  will  yield  therefore  256,000,000  of 
gallons  annually.  If  then  there  are  ten  square  miles  of 
area  on  the  water  shed  of  the  Trout  Brook  and  its  affluents, 
we  have  the  grand  aggregate  net  accumulation  available 
for  city  supply,  equal  to  2,560,000,000  gallons  annually. 
As  by  the  last  Annual  Report  of  your  Board  the  daily 
average  consumption  in  Hartford  did  not  exceed  1,000,000 
of  gallons,  it  would  seem  safe  to  look  to  Trout  Brook 
as  a reliable  source  of  auxiliary  supply,  so  far  as  to  the 
quantity  of  water,  proper  provision  being  made  for  storage. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  this  estimate  does  not  show 
the  total  aggregate  rain-fall,  but  only  the  available  quantity 
left  after  all  losses  from  evaporation,  soakage,  &c.,  have 
been  allowed  for  in  the  most  liberal  manner.  As  the  basis 
of  this  calculation  is  beyond  question  reliable,  (i.  e.  the 
average  annual  rain-fall,)  it  is  plain  you  can  afford  to  grant 
all  the  deductions  from  this  estimate  which  the  most  incred- 
ulous may  be  disposed  to  make  and  still  retain  an  available 
aggregate  far  in  excess  of  any  present  or  prospective 
demand  of  your  city. 

As  the  results  just  given  may  startle  those  who  have  not 
considered  the  almost  unmeasured  bounty  of  nature  in  her 
water  supply,  it  may  be  well  to  recall  the  fact  that  the 
estimated  flow  of  Trout  Brook  on  the  11th  of  June,  at 
6,000,000  gallons  daily,  corresponds  to  an  aggregate  flow  of 
nearly  2,200,000,000  of  gallons  yearly.  If  the  flow  had 
been  7,000,000  daily  in  place  of  6,000,000,  the  aggregate 
would  have  been  annually  - - - 2,555,000,000 

while  the  calculation  requires  - - 2,560,000,000 

This  singular  coincidence  goes  far  to  show  that  the  flow  of 


9 


F 

Trout  Brook  on  the  11th  of  June  was  not  far  from  its 
average  daily  flow  for  the  whole  year.  Since  making  this 
calculation,  I learn  from  Mr.  Bissell,  without  communicating 
to  him  my  results,  that  he  has  fixed  the  daily  average  flow 
of  the  stream  for  the  whole  year  at  about  seven  millions  of 
gallons.  We  may  here  rest  the  inquiry  as  to  the  adequacy 
of  the  supply  from  this  source,  believing  it  to  be  beyond  all 
dispute,  abundant. 

Let  us  now  inquire, 

1st.  As  to  the  purity  of  the  water  from  Trout  Brook, 
comparing  it  with  that  now  in  use  in  Hartford  and  in  other 
places. 

2d.  Whether  there  exist  any  causes  which  may  unfavor- 
ably affect  the  continued  purity  of  the  water  when  stored 
in  reservoirs,  considering  in  this  connection  analogous  cases 
of  storage. 

3d.  Precautions  desirable  to  be  taken  to  secure  the  best 
possible  quality  of  water  for  a city. 

1st.  purity  of  the  water.— physical  properties. 

The  following  results  have  been  attained  from  samples  of 
the  waters  described,  taken  on  the  11th  of  June.  They 
were  collected  in  clean  basket  bottles,  and  were  suffered  to 
repose  for  some  days  before  the  trials  were  made. 

No.  1.  Water  drawn  from  the  main  stream  of  Trout 
Brook,  near  where  the  proposed  dam  is  to  be  located. 

No.  2.  Was  from  the  north  fork  of  the  main  stream. 

No.  3.  Was  from  one  of  the  springs  on  the  Shale  near 
the  margin  of  the  wet  land. 

No.  4.  Was  from  the  Connecticut  River,  drawn  from 
the  rising  main  at  the  Pump  House  of  the  City  Works. 

A.  COLOR. 

Comparing  No.  1,  2 and  4,  in  colorless  glasses  of  equal 
size  and  form,  looking  down  through  the  water  upon  a 
pure  white  surface,  all  lateral  reflection  being  cut  off,  all 
appeared  brownish.  This  color  was  stronger  in  No.  4 
2 


10 


than  in  the  others,  least  in  No.  2,  and  in  No.  1 intermediate 
between  the  two  others. 

No.  3 was  absolutely  colorless  as  compared  with  pure 
distilled  water. 

B.  TRANSPARENCY. 

After  agitating  the  water  in  the  demijohns,  the  following 
observations  were  made  on  comparative  transparency. 

No.  1.  Numerous  minute  flocks  were  seen  of  apparently 
very  light  substance,  slowly  settling  to  the  bottom  of  the 
vessel  and  slightly  disturbing  the  transparency  of  the 
water.  After  twenty-four  hours  rest  all  these  particles 
were  not  completely  subsided. 

No.  2.  This  was  quite  bright,  transparency  not  disturbed 
by  agitation,  almost  no  sediment  or  floating  particles. 

No.  3.  Completely  bright  and  undisturbed,  no  floating 
particles  or  sediment. 

No.  4.  Much  disturbed  by  floating  particles,  apparently 
of  organic  substance,  settling  very  slowly  to  the  bottom 
in  brownish  pellets.  After  twenty-four  hours  of  repose 
this  sediment  had  not  completely  subsided. 

C.  TASTE. 

No.  1.  This  had  a decided  taste  of  vegetable  matter, 
similar  to  the  familiar  taste  of  Croton  water  when  not  iced, 
but  not  as  strong. 

No.  2 and  4.  Both  these  have  less  taste  than  No.  1,  but 
as  between  themselves  no  difference  could  be  detected. 

No.  3 was  quite  destitute  of  taste,  no  trace  of  vegetable 
flavor,  but  the  sprightly  character  of  the  best  spring 
water. 

D.  SMELL. 

No.  1.  Has  a fresh  smell,  such  as  belongs  to  all  soft 
brook  water. 

No.  2.  Has  the  same  odor  in  a much  less  degree. 

No.  3.  Is  destitute  of  all  odor.  • 

No.  4.  Is  slightly  odorous  in  a less  degree  than  No.  1 
and  2,  but  the  odor  of  the  same  quality. 


11 


From  these  observations  I infer  that  the  water  of  the 
main  stream  in  Trout  Brook  is  at  least  as  free  from  color, 
smell  and  taste  as  Croton  water.  That  the  water  of  the 
north  branch  is  superior  in  all  respects  to  the  same  stand- 
ard. That  Trout  Brook  has  less  suspended  matter  in  it 
than  is  found  in  the  waters  of  Connecticut  River  at  an 
average  stage,  and  that  the  color  and  other  physical  prop- 
erties noted  are  derived  chiefly  from  the  westerly  branch 
of  the  main  stream,  since  the  north  branch  is  much 
freer  from  these  peculiarities  than  the  main  stream  itself. 
The  cause  of  this  difference  is  obvious  on  an  inspection  of 
the  ground  over  which  the  two  streams  flow,  that  on  the 
western  stream  having  more  decomposing  vegetable  matter, 
all  of  which  should  be  removed  before  flowing  the  ground. 

CHEMICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  WATERS. 

No.  1.  One  gallon*  of  this  water  contains  3.268  grains 
of  solid  matter  consisting  of 

Organic  matter,  1.634  grains, 

Inorganic  matter,  silica,  .642 

Lime,  magnesia,  alkalies,  chlorine, 

sulphuric  and  carbonic  acids,  .992 — 1.634 

3.268 

No.  2.  One  gallon  of  this  water  contains  2.043  grains 
of  solid  matter  consisting  of 

Organic  matter,  1.226  grains. 

Inorganic  matter — silica,  .543 

Lime,  magnesia,  alkalies,  chlorine, 
sulphuric  and  carbonic  acid,  .274 — .817 

2.043 

No.  3.  One  gallon  of  this  water  contains  3.572  grains 
of  solid  matter,  consisting  of 


# The  American  standard  gallon  of  58,372  Grains. 


12 


Organic  matter,  .934  grains. 

Inorganic  matter — silica,  .502 

Lime,  magnesia,  alkalies,  chlorine, 

nitric  acid  and  carbonic  acid,  2.136 — 2.638 

3.572 

contains  2.568  grains 
1.051 

.210 

1.307—1.517 

2.568 

In  these  determinations  all  suspended  matter  was  re- 
moved by  filtration. 

The  first  thing  which  strikes  the  attention  on  examining 
these  results  is  the  remarkable  purity  of  all  these  waters. 
This  will  be  rendered  more  conspicuous  by  observing  the 
annexed  table  giving  the  results  of  the  total  solid  contents, 
&c.,  of  some  other  metropolitan  water  supplies. 

Table. 

Comparative  purity  and  hardness  of  several  waters  used  for  Metropolitan  supply. 


No.  4.  One  gallon  of  this  water 
of  solid  matter  consisting  of 
Organic  matter, 

Inorganic  matter — silica, 

Lime,  magnesia,  alkalies,  sul- 
phuric and  carbonic  acids, 


Waters. 

A. 

B. 

c. 

D. 

E. 

F- 

G. 

H. 

Total  solid  contents  one 
Imp.  gallon, 

19.50 

21.72 

12.71 

6.59 

4.04 

3.07 

3.91 

52.28 

“ organic  matter, 

2.79 

3.07 

4.73 

1.40 

1.39 

1.26 

1.95 

“ inorganic  matter, 

16.71 

18.65 

7.98 

5.19 

2.65 

1.81 

1.95 

Carbonate  of  lime, 

7.82 

10.90 

2.52 

2. 

.29 

.01 

.017 

16.20 

Degree  of  hardness, 

14. °9 

14° 

1°.64 

1°.19 

10°.55| 

A.  New  River,  London, 

B.  River  Thames,  “ 

C.  Croton  River,  New  York, 

T).  Fairmount,  Philadelphia, 

E.  Cochituate,  Boston, 

F.  Connecticut,  Hartford, 

G.  Trout  Brook,  West  Hartford, 

H.  Well,  N.  W.  corner  State  House  yard. 

The  above  analyses  are  calculated  for  the  Imperial  gallon, 
containing  70,000  grains  of  distilled  water. 


by  Dr.  Graham  and  others. 

ii  ii  ii 

“ Author,  1845. 

u u a 

a a << 

“ “ June,  1861. 


13 


An  inspection  of  this  table  will  show  that  the  waters 
used  and  proposed  to  be  used  for  the  supply  of  the  city  of 
Hartford  are  of  almost  unequalled  purity  and  softness. 
I have  selected  two  of  the  London  waters  as  the  best 
example  of  a moderately  hard  river  water  from  a calcareous 
district.  The  London  waters  are  remarkable  for  their 
brilliancy , a quality  due  to.the  lime  which  combines  with 
and  throws  down  the  vegetable  matter. 

It  has  been  shown,  by  an  extended  chemical  research, 
that  the  maximum  of  organic  matter  is  found  in  natural 
waters  at  mid-summer,  is  at  a minimum  in  winter  after 
freezing,  and  is  diminished  by  rains.  We  may  therefore 
expect  the  water  from  Trout  Brook  to  give  better  results 
in  this  particular  by  storing  than  we  have  obtained  in  this 
examination ; although  it  is  difficult  to  know  why  anything 
better  should  be  desired. 

‘ The  exact  apportionment  of  the  very  minute  quantities 
of  the  several  mineral  constituents  in  the  Hartford  waters 
can  be  of  no  practical  importance.  The  quantities  avail- 
able are  too  small  for  the  most  satisfactory  results.  An- 
nexed are,  however,  the  ratios  obtained  for  the  principal 
constituents  in  No.  1,  calculated  for  one  standard  gallon, 
which  contains  58,372  grains,  as  follows: — 


Alkalies,  (potasli  and  soda,) 

.238 

Magnesia, 

.141 

Lime, 

.617 

Silica, 

.473 

Chlorine, 

.070 

Sulphuric  acid, 

.092 

Total  inorganic  matter, 

1.626 

“ organic  u 

1.634  3.260 

“ water  and  air  in  solution, 

58,368.740 

u grains  in  one  gallon, 

58,372.000 

14 


COMPARISON  OF  THESE  RESULTS  WITH  THE  ANALYSES  OF 
SEVERAL  WELL  WATERS  FROM  HARTFORD. 

Several  years  ago,  about  the  time  the  public  mind  began 
to  direct  itself  to  the  subject  of  water  supply  in  Hartford, 
several  analyses  were  made  in  my  laboratory  by  Mr.  B.  W. 
Bull,  of  the  waters  of  some  pyiblic  and  private  wells  in 
your  city.  I believe  it  will  be  interesting  to  cite  these 
analyses  in  this  connection,  especially  as  some  of  them  are 
used  as  terms  of  comparison  for  the  hardness  test  under 
the  next  hea#d. 

The  waters  analyzed  were  taken  in  184T  from  the  follow- 
ing wells : 

No.  1 was  from  a well  in  the  North-west  corner  of  the 
State  House  Yard. 

No.  2 was  from  the  well  of  H.  Seymour  (formerly)  16 
(now  No.  43)  Main  street. 

No.  3 was  from  the  well  on  the  grounds  of  the  American 
Asylum. 

No.  4 was  from  Lane’s  Coffee  House,  North  Main  street. 

No.  5 was  from  the  New  England  House,  Front  street. 

The  results  of  the  analyses  of  these  waters  are  given 
in  the  following  Tables. 

Table  I.  gives  the  specific  weights  and  the  amount  of 
solid  contents  left  on  evaporation  in  one  American  standard 
gallon  of  58,372  grains  at  60°  F. 


Table  I. 


No.  1. 

No.  2. 

No.  3. 

No.  4. 

No.  5. 

Specific  gravity,  (pure  ) 
water  being  1 .00000, ) £ 
Grains  of  solid  matter  ) 
in  one  gallon,  ) 

1.00081 

41.479 

1.00044 

32.157 

1.00010 

19.334 

1.00078 

37.102 

1.00106 

69.046 

Table  II.  gives  the  amounts  of  the  several  constituents 
found  by  analysis : 


15 


Table  II. 

Constituents  of  one  gallon  in  grains , as  found  by  analysis. 


It  No.  1. 

No.  2. 

No.  3. 

No.  4. 

No.  5. 

Chlorine, 

12.765 

3.563 

2.407 

3.517 

21.557 

Sulphuric  Acid,  . 

2.296 

2.114 

1.028 

2.710 

3.061 

Carbonic  Acid,  . 

6.449 

3.429 

.561 

3.826 

4.533 

Lime, 

12.192 

7.671 

7.075 

8.103 

10.358 

Magnesia,  . 

1.168 

1.116 

.555 

4.621 

5.293 

Alumina  and  Iron, 

.204 

2.267 

.261 

traces. 

Alumina, 

.817 

Soda, 

7.437 

6.362 

6.893 

13.764 

23.718 

Silica, 

1.052 

3.474 

.817 

.261 

.526 

Ammonia,  . 

Nitric  Acid, 

j traces. 

traces. 

• • 

1 

43.563 

29.996 

20.153 

37.063 

69.046 

Comment  is  needless  to  show  the  great  inferiority  of  the 
old  well  waters  as  compared  with  the  improved  sources 
now  in  use  or  at  command.* 

COMPARATIVE  HARDNESS  OF  WATERS. 

The  quality  of  hardness  in  waters  is  one  well  understood 
in  the  common  experience  of  life.  This  quality  is  owing 
chiefly  to  the  presence  of  salts  of  lime.  Water  is  called 
hard  because  it  forms  with  soap  a harsh  curd,  which  inter- 
feres with  the  process  of  washing.  This  curd  is  an  insolu- 
ble lime  soap,  and  its  production  is  at  the  cost  of  a quantity 
of  soap  proportioned  to  the  hardness  of  the  water.  In  wash- 
ing with  a hard  water,  soap  enough  must  be  used  to  destroy 
the  lime  salt,  before  any  useful  effect  is  obtained  from  it. 
When  magnesia  is  present  in  any  considerable  degree,  it 
greatly  modifies  the  eifect  of  the  lime. 

A solution  of  soap  in  diluted  alcohol  forms  a very  con- 
venient test  for  the  hardness  of  waters ; and  by  using  a 
solution  of  lime  of  known  strength,  as  a term  of  compari- 
son, a scale  of  degrees  of  comparative  hardness  may  be 


* See  Mr.  Bull’s  paper  in  the  American  Journal  of  Science,  [2]  IV.,  385. 


16 


obtained.  The  scale  of  Dr.  Clark,  of  England,  is  that  most 
in  use.  On  this  scale  each  degree  of  hardness  represents 
one  grain  of  carbonate  of  lime  (or  its  equivalent)  in  one 
imperial  gallon  or  70,000  grains  of  water. 

Tested  in  this  way  your  waters  give  the  following  results : 


SOURCE  OF  WATER.  HARDNESS. 

West  Hartford,  June  11,  . . . 1°.19 

46  44  Spring,  (No.  3,)  . . 1°.61 

Connecticut  River, 1°.64 

Well  at  N.W.  corner  State  House  Yard,  Aug.  28, 10°.55 
44  on  H.  Seymour’s  residence,  Main  street,  13°.44 
44  44  Grounds  of  American  Asylum,  8°. 39 

44  at  New  England  Hotel,  Front  street,  19°. 22 


I do  not  offer  the  results  obtained  on  the  hardness  of  the 
well  waters  above  given,  in  order  to  compare  them  with 
the  analyses  of  Mr.  Bull  in  1847.  * Many  circumstances 
may  have  varied  the  composition  of  these  waters,  and  to 
institute  a comparison,  a new  set  of  analyses  would  be 
required  on  the  waters  as  they  now  are.  The  object  in 
view  did  not  seem  to  require  this  additional  labor,  since 
nobody  now  proposes  to  resume  the  use  of  these  wells.  It 
is,  however,  not  uninstructive  to  note  the  economical  advant- 
ages of  using  soft  water,  such  as  you  now  enjoy,  as  com- 
pared with  the  effects  of  the  well  water  formerly  in  use. 

The  effect  of  hardness  in  waters  is  such  that  each  grain 
of  carbonate  of  lime  (or  its  equivalent  salt)  in  a gallon  of 
water,  destroys  ten  grains  of  soap.  Assuming  each  degree 
of  hardness  as  the  equivalent  of  one  grain  of  lime,  and 
taking  the  average  of  hardness  in  the  above  well  waters  at 
13°,  it  follows  that  the  hardness  in  100  gallons  of  such 
water  would  occasion  the  loss  of  about  thirty  ounces  of 
soap,  before  any  useful  effect  is  produced.  The  lime  in  the 
same  quantity  of  Trout  Brook  water,  as  it  was  June  11, 
„ would  destroy  only  about  120  grains  of  soap,  less  than 
108th  part  as  much  as  the  water  from  the  old  wells. 


17 


The  same  is  true  in  an  almost  equal  degree  for  the  waters 
of  Connecticut  river.  You  enjoy,  therefore,  almost  une- 
qualled softness  of  water  for  metropolitan  supply. 

The  advantages  of  soft  water  in  the  better  preparation  of 
food  are  as  important  as  those  found  in  washing,  bathing 
and  manufacturing  uses. 

The  only  cause  *of  anxiety  to  be  felt  from  the  use  of  soft 
water  is  in  the  fact  that  some  soft  waters  act  injuriously  on 
lead.  This  cause  of  anxiety,  happily,  is  shown  by  the  exper- 
iments made  with  lead  in  connection  with  your  waters  to 
be  without  any  foundation  in  fact.  The  results  alluded  to 
are  next  in  order. 

ACTION  OF  THE  WATERS  ON  LEAD. 

To  test  this  very  important  point,  equal  sized  plates  of 
bright  lead  were  placed  in  bottles,  each  containing  a speci- 
men of  one  of  the  waters,  while  a similar  slip  was  exposed 
in  the  same  manner  in  distilled  water.  In  Nos.  1,  2 and 
4 there  was  observed,  after  twenty-four  hours  exposure,  a 
discoloration  of  the  lead  from  the  precipitation  of  a brown- 
ish compound  upon  the  surface  of  the  lead — an  organic 
compound  of  lead  covering  the  surface  like  a varnish — the 
water  in  each  case  becoming  nearly  colorless. 

In  No.  3 there  was  a visible  action  almost  immediately, 
the  lead  turning  black,  owing  probably  to  the  action  of  the 
trace  of  nitrous  acid  found  in  this  water.  This  action 
did  not  increase  after  24  hours. 

The  distilled  water  attackedi^he  lead  with  energy  and 
soon  became  filled  with  brilliant^mall  scales  of  carbonate 
of  lead,  floating  in  the  water. 

After  two  months’  similar  exposure,  there  appeared  no 
difference  in  the  condition  of  the  lead,  beyond  what  is 
described  as  happening  within  twenty-four  hours.  No 
signs  of  corrosion  were  visible  under  or  upon  the  brownish 
varnished  surface,  while  the  water,  Nos.  1,  2 and  4,  which 
had  stood  two  months  on  the  lead,  gave  hardly  an  appre- 
3 


18 


ciable  trace  of  that  metal  to  tests.  The  lead  from  No  3, 
(spring  water,)  was  sensibly  corroded  and  was  not  covered 
as  in  the  other  cases  with  a varnish-like  deposit;  there 
was  no  organic  matter  in  it  to  produce  such  an  action. 
This  water  contained  sensible  quantities  of  carbonate  of  lead. 

The  lead  which  had  lain  two  months  in  distilled  water, 
was  very  sensibly  corroded,  and  the  surface,  felt  rough  to 
the  touch.* 

I infer  from  these  trials  that  either  No.  1,  2 or  4 may  be 
safely  conducted  through  leaden  service  pipes,  and  into 
lead-lined  cisterns,  without  injury  to  health,  provided  care 
be  taken  in  laying  down  the  pipes  to  exclude  dust  of  lime 
and  other  rubbish  which  is  liable  in  process  of  building  to 
fall  into  open  pipes.  It  has  been  shown  that  several  cases 
of  lead  poisoning  were  directly  referable  to  the  presence  of 
foreign  bodies  in  the  pipes,  which  lodging  in  the  bends  had 
favored  a local  action,  causing  the  corrosion  of  the  lead. 
(See  the  American  Journal  of  Science,  July,  1861,  p. 
115.) 

As  the  spring  water,  No.  3,  can  in  any  case  form  but  a 
small  part  of  the  whole  volume  of  the  stream,  it  can  not 
affect  the  quality  of  the  whole  water  in  this  respect,  as  is 
conclusively  shown  by  the  result  of  this  trial. 

ACID  OR  ALKALINE  CONDITION  OF  THE  WATERS. 

It  may  in  this  connection  (with  regard  to  the  action  of 
the  waters  on  lead)  be  of  some  interest  to  state  that 
neither  of  these  water^|as  found  entirely  neutral  to  tests 
for  neutrality.  Thus,  Nos.  2, 1 and  4 were  slightly  alkaline 
in  the  order  named,  commencing  with  2,  as  compared  with 
distilled  water. 

No.  3,  as  compared  with  the  same  standard,  was  found 
to  be  slightly  acid. 


* These  samples  are  presented  with  this  Report. 


19 


2d.  THE  PROBABLE  EFFECT  OF  STORING  THE  WATERS  OF 
TROUT  BROOK  UPON  THEIR  FITNESS  FOR  USE,  &c. 

The  inquiry  very  naturally  arises,  will  there  be  any 
unfavorable  effect  produced  by  the  accumulation  of  these 
waters  in  artificial  lakes  ? 

I reply,  if  proper  care  is  taken  in  the  construction  of 
the  reservoirs  and  in  cleaning  up  the  ground  which  they 
are  to  cover,  as  well  as  the  margins  of  the  streams  wherever 
they  are  swampy  or  boggy,  the  effect  of  storing  the  water 
will  be  to  improve  it  in  every  particular  as  compared  with 
the  waters  of  the  stream.  The  water  contains,  in  an 
average  state  of  flow,  only  two  grains  of  organic  matter  in 
seventy  thousand  grains  or  one  gallon  of  water.  This 
minute  quantity  imparts  to  it  only  a feeble  color  and  faint 
odor,  which  in  the  north  branch  of  the  stream  are  com- 
paratively inappreciable.  The  origin  of  this  organic  matter 
is  largely  in  the  boggy  margins  of  portions  of  the  stream.; 
these  must  be  properly  cleansed  by  grubbing,  and  with 
that  operation  the  qualities  spoken  of  will  probably  disap- 
pear, or  become  quite  inappreciable.  But  there  is  another 
cause  of  annoyance  which  has  made  its  appearance  at  New 
Britain  and  Danbury,  where  storage  for  water  has  been 
provided,  and  to  which  it  is  important  to  allude  in  this 
connection. 

At  New  Britain  an  artificial  lake  has  been  formed  over 
a mile  in  length  filling  the  interval  between  two  trap 
mountains  about  a third  of  a mile  apart.  A small  moun- 
tain stream  had  its  origin  from  the  springs  which  flow  out 
at  the  base  of  these  hills,  a stream  far  smaller  than  Trout 
Brook.  No  stream  flows  into  this  artificial  lake,  which  is 
kept  quite  full  by  the  rain-fall  and  the  flow  of  the  springs 
alluded  to.  The  area  now  covered  by  its  waters  was 
densely  clothed  with  shrubs  and  many  large  trees  which 
have  been  cleared  away  by  the  axe  only.  The  soil  was 
wet  and  boggy  and  the  rank  growths  of  numerous  aquatic 
plants  were  left  undisturbed  on  the  swampy  surface,  together 


20 


with  the  stumps  and  roots  of  the  trees  cut  away.  The 
natural  result  has  been  that  the  vegetable  juices  flowing 
from  such  a vast  steep  of  decomposing  organic  substances 
has,  in  each  summer  since  the  lake  was  formed,  produced 
an  unpleasant  effect  on  the  water.  In  such  a favorable 
soil  much  confervoid  growth  haTs  developed  itself  with  the 
progress  of  the  season,  and  by  the  last  of  June  some  of 
these  plants,  existing  in  great  numbers,  have  reached  their 
limit  and  Hied,  producing  a decomposition  and  the  dissem- 
ination of  many  filaments  of  vegetable  growth  through  the 
water.  This  trouble  has  reached  its  height  by  the  middle 
of  July  and  then  rapidly  disappeared.  I have  examined 
carefully  into  the  conditions  and  causes  of  this  phenom- 
enon at  New  Britain,  with  reference  to  your  case,  and  am 
of  opinion  that  it  is  owing  wholly  to  the  want  of  a proper 
preparation  of  the  bottom  and  sides  of  the  lake.  All  the 
organic  matters  alluded  to,  with  the  boggy  soil,  should  have 
been  removed  before  the  ground  was  flooded.  The  very 
moderate  capital  of  that  enterprise,  ($50,000,)  forbade 
that  expense.  I am,  however,  quite  satisfied,  after  two 
summers’  consideration  and  examination  of  this  case,  that 
the  annoyance  alluded  to  is  self  limited  and  will  soon  dis- 
appear or  cease  to  recur  after  a year  or  two,  having  been  in 
the  present  year  limited  to  a few  weeks,  and  unattended, 
so  far  as  I can  learn,  with  any  detriment  to  health.  The 
water  at  New  Britain,  with  the  exception  of  the  brief 
period  alluded  to,  is  as  *pure  as  possible,  and  the  visitor 
viewing  this  beautiful  little  lake  from  any  point  where 
the  dam  is  not  seen  can  hardly  credit  that  it  is  an  artifi- 
cial lake  of  only  three  years’  standing. 

I am  equally  satisfied  that,  in  the  case  of  the  proposed 
reservoir  at  West  Hartford,  the  annoyance  experienced  at 
New  Britain  will  never  make  its  appearance  if  the  pre- 
cautions alluded  to  are  observed. 

GOOD  SUCCESS  OE  STORING  AT  BROOKLYN. 

At  Brooklyn,  N.  Y.,  they  enjoy  a very  fine  quality  of 
water,  gathered  in  collecting  reservoirs  from  a wide  surface. 


21 


and  all  the  bottoms  of  the  artificial  lakes  having  been 
carefully  cleaned  there  has  been  no  trouble  from  the 
growth  of  vegetable  organisms  in  the  water. 

The  gathering  grounds  about  the  -proposed  site  of  the 
West  Hartford  supply  are  as  free  from  objection  as  to 
sources  of  contamination  as  any  which  can  be  found.  Much 
of  the  surface  is  a clean  gravel  or  sand  covered  by  a slight 
growth  of  grass,  and  the  amount  of  cultivated  land  where 
drainage  flows  into  the  brook  is  small. 

I have,  therefore,  no  hesitation  in  predicting  that  the 
storage  of  the  waters  of  Trout  Brook  will  be  a complete 
success,  both  in  the  abundance  and  quality  of  the  waters 
and  the  absence  of  any  cause  of  anxiety,  real  or  imaginary, 
as  to  the  unfavorable  effect  of  such  storage. 

3d.  what  precautions  should  be  taken  to  secure 

THE  BEST  POSSIBLE  QUALITY  OF  WATER  FOR  A CITY 

SUPPLY. 

This  inquiry,  in  your  case,  does  not  go  behind  the  source 
of  supply,  which  has  been  shown  to  be  both  abundant  and 
of  the  best  quality,  whether  we  refer  to  the  Connecticut 
River  or  the  new  source  now  under  consideration.  The 
inquiry  may  therefore  be  restricted  to  the  mode  of  storing 
and  distributing  the  water. 

In  all  cases  of  supply  drawn  from  rivers,  the  water  dis- 
tributed to  consumers  is  liable,  unless  proper  precautions 
are  taken  to  prevent  it,  to  great  variations  in  transparency, 
owing  to  the  muddy  state  of  the  river  in  times  of  flood. 
The  researches  of  Dr.  Graham  and  others  show  that  the 
* suspended  matter”  in  the  water  of  the  N6w  River,  in 
London,  is  about  1.5  grains  to  the  imperial  gallon,  or  one- 
half  as  much  as  the  total  solid  contents  of  all  kinds  in  the 
Hartford  waters  as  they  were  when  these  inquiries  were 
instituted.  At  times,  no  doubt,  the  “suspended  matters” 
in  the  Connecticut  River  water  are  as  great  as  are  found 
in  New  River.  In  fact,  your  own  experience  with  your 
present  city  supply,  in  times  of  flood,  is  such  as  to  satisfy 


22 


you  that  some  precaution  is  indispensable  to  avoid  the 
annoyance  to  consumers  arising  from  this  cause.  You 
now  pump  the  river  water  into  a distributing  reservoir 
of  too  limited  capacity,  which  is  unprovided  with  any 
means  to  favor  the  subsidence  of  suspended  matter,  much 
less  do  you  filter  the  water.  It  consequently  passes  into 
the  circulation  in  a state  often  quite  unfit  for  use.  This 
evil  would  be  much  abated  if  you  had  even  two  compart- 
ments in  your  existing  reservoir,  one  as  a receiving  and 
subsiding  reservoir,  and  the  other  supplied  from  this,  or 
the  two  used  alternately  after  allowing  a certain  time  for 
subsidence. 

FILTRATION. 

But  no  means  have  yet  been  found  so  effectual  in  the 
proper  preparation  of  water  for  towns  as  simple  filtration 
through  porous  media. 

DIFFERENCE  BETWEEN  SPRING  AND  RAIN  WATER. 

The  chief  cause  of  difference  between  “spring  water” 
and  “river  water”  is  that  the  former  is  the  result  of 
Nature’s  process  of  filtration  through  the  soil  and  porous 
layers  on  the  surface,  while  the  river  water  represents 
the  rains  plus  the  wash  of  the  surface.  The  spring,  No.  3 
of  this  report,  was  perfectly  brilliant,  colorless  and  brisk, 
but  the  process  of  filtration  had  been  carried  too  far;  the 
organic  matter  was  almost  all  removed,  and  some  new  inor- 
ganic elements  added,  which  render  the  water  unsafe  for  use 
with  lead.  Our  artificial  arrangements  must  then  be  made 
to  imitate  the  great  processes  of  nature,  taking  care  not 
to  go  too  far,  of  which,  indeed,  there  is  little  danger.  Thus 
may  we  hope  to  turn  the  river  into  “ spring  water,”  as  far 
as  brilliancy  and  briskness  go. 

AERATION  OF  WATER. 

The  sparkling  quality  so  highly  esteemed  in  spring  and 
well  water,  is  due  chiefly  to  the  presence  of  atmospheric 
air  and  carbonic  acid  held  in  solution  in  the  water.  Rain 


23 


water  recently  fallen,  and  river  water,  owe  their  peculiar 
flatness  to  the  absence  more  or  less  complete  of  these 
qualities.  It  is  well  known  that  rain  water,  by  long  stand- 
ing in  subterranean  cisterns,  acquires  to  a good  degree 
the  sparkling  quality  of  well  water.  The  wells  in  the  city 
of  Yenice  are  all  rain  water  cisterns,  constructed  in  a' 
peculiar  manner  to  secure  the  constant  filtration  of  the 
water  from  the  outer  or  containing  cistern,  into  an  inner, 
well-shaped  cavity,  whose  bottom  and  sides  are  composed 
of  porous  stones  and  bricks.  This  arrangement  is  an 
excellent  substitute  for  the  natural  process  of  filtration, 
which  supplies  our  ordinary  wells,  and  the  water  has  none 
of  the  qualities  of  rain  water,  except  its  softness  and 
purity.  This  beneficial  change  is  due  mainly  to  the  aera- 
tion of  the  water.  The  storage  of  water  in  large  reser- 
voirs, where  it  is  permitted  to  stand  exposed  to  atmos- 
pheric influences,  produces  more  slowly,  perhaps,  but  not 
less  surely,  the  same  desirable  effects  from  aeration.  When 
this  mode  of  storage  is  combined  with  the  system  of  filtra- 
tration  suggested  in  this  report,  the  best  results  may  be 
expected.  Such  we  hope  will  be  the  system  adopted  to 
secure  the  aeration  of  the  waters  of  Trout  Brook. 

STRUCTURE  OF  FILTERS. 

As  but  little  has  been  made  public  in  this  country 
respecting  the  modes  of  filtration  found  effectual  in  the 
old  world,  I will  state  briefly  the  method  adopted  with 
much  success  at  the  Chelsea  water  works  in  London,  by 
Mr.  James  Simpson. 

The  water,  after  being  pumped  up  from  the  river,  is 
allowed  to  stand  in  subsiding  reservoirs  for  six  hours  before 
it  is  suffered  to  run  on  to  the  filter  beds.  These  are  large 
beds  of  sand  and  gravel,  each  exposing  a surface  of  270 
square  feet,  and  the  water  passes  through  them  at  the  rate 
of  about  6£  gallons  to  the  square  foot  of  filtering  surface 
per  hour,  making  a total  quantity  of  1,687.5  gallons  per 


24 


hour  through  each  filter.  The  filters  are  composed  of  the 
following  strata  in  a descending  order  : 


No.  1,  Fine  sand,  2 ft.  6 in. 

“ 2,  Coarser  sand,  1 “ 

“ 3,  Shells,  6 “ 

“ 4,  Fine  gravel,  3 “ 

“ 5,  Coarse  gravel,  3 “ 3 “ 


These  several  layers  of  filtering  materials  are  not  placed 
perfectly  flat,  but  are  disposed  in  undulating  folds,  and 
below  each  convex  curve  of  each  undulation  is  placed  a 
porous  earthen  ware  tile,  which  conducts  the  filtered 
water  into  the  mains  for  distribution.  The  depth  of  the 
water  over  the  fine  sand  is  four  feet  and  a half.  The  upper 
layer  of  sand  is  removed  about  every  six  months,  but 
the  body  of  the  filter  has  been  in  use  over  twenty-five 
years.  Their  action  is  extremely  satisfactory — they  usually 
remove  all  the  suspended  matter.  The  Thames,  in  flood, 
contains  a quantity  of  very  fine  ferruginous  clay,  which 
not  even  a charcoal  filter  will  remove.  The  Connecticut, 
it  is  believed,  never  contains  any  thing  which  would  not 
be  completely  removed  by  a good  filter.  I do  not  now  go 
into  more  detail  as  to  the  construction  of  filters  and  their 
efficacy  to  give  a full  supply,  since  all  those  points  must  be 
carefully  considered  in  the  light  of  abundant  experience  by 
your  Engineer.  There  is,  however,  one  other  point  worthy 
of  note  in  this  connection — namely,  the  curious  and  unex- 
pected  results  obtained  by  Mr.  Witt,  Chemist  to  the  Chel- 
sea Water  Company.  This  chemist  found,  by  a series  of 
carefully  conducted  analyses,  that  the  process  of  filtration 
not  only  removed  the  suspended  impurities  of  the  water, 
but  even  withdrew  dissolved  salts  from  solution  in  water. 
This  unexpected  result  (the  details  of  which  would  be  out 
of  place  here)  shows  the  importance  of  filtration  from  a 
hygenic  point  of  view,  as  well  as  from  motives  of  general 
comfort  and  cleanliness. 

In  regard  to  the  storage  of  the  waters  of  Trout  Brook, 


25 


I would  recommend  that  besides  the  main  distributing^ 
reservoir,  with  its  filtering  beds,  if  you  decide  to  adopt  the 
process  of  filtration,  there  should  be  supplemental  reser- 
voirs on  each  branch  of  the  stream,  to  hold  back  the  winter 
and  spring  floods,  as  well  for  storage  as  to  arrest  the  sus- 
pended matter,  so  that  the  quantity  of  sediment  should  in 
no  case  become  considerable  in  the  main  or  distributing 
reservoir.  If  proper  pains  are  taken  in  cleaning  up  the 
course  of  the  streams  and  the  bottom  of  the  reservoirs,  the 
water  will,  I am  confident,  be  found  well  nigh  colorless  and 
completely  clear  at  all  times,  unless  during  very  heavy 
freshets. 

The  vast  advantages  you  will  derive  from  taking  in  this 
new  supply  at  a head  adequate  to  reach  the  highest  points 
in  Hartford,  without  artificial  help,  I will  not  dwell  on. 
You  are  happy  in  having  at  command  the  inexhaustible  full- 
ness of  the  great  river,  but  you  may  yet  learn  to  place  your 
main  dependence  upon  what  you  now  consider  as  only  an 
auxiliary  source,  combining  as  it  does  the  advantage  of  an 
ample  head  and  flow,  with  superior  facilities  for  storage 
and  purification. 

I am,  gentlemen,  with  much  respect, 

Your  obedient  servant, 

B.  SILLIMAN,  Jr. 


New  Haven,  August  30th,  1861. 


* 


* 


REPORT 


Of  McREE  SWIFT,  Esq.,  Civil  Engineer. 


Jo  the  Board  of  Water  Commissioners  of  the  City  of 
Hartford : 

Gentlemen  : 

At  your  request  I herewith  submit  my  views  on  the 
question  of  securing  an  additional  supply  of  water  for  the 
City  of  Hartford. 

The  average  daily  consumption  of  water  in  Hartford  for 
the  year  ending  March  1,  1861,  was  897,035  gallons,  the 
extremes  being  717,395  gallons  daily  in  April  1860,  and 
1,028,312  gallons  per  day  in  February  1861.  A basis  of 
2,000,000  gallons  per  day  is  therefore  considered  sufficient 
for  the  present  and  prospective  population  of  your  city. 

After  a careful  examination  of  the  whole  subject,  I am 
satisfied  that  one  of  two  plans  should  be  adopted  to  secure 
this  increased  supply  ; — either  by  increasing  your  present 
pumping  facilities,  and  building  a larger  reservoir  on 
higher  ground,  or  by  adopting  the  proposition  to  con- 
struct a large  receiving  or  storing  reservoir  on  Trout 
Brook  in  West  Hartford,  of  elevation  sufficient  to  deliver 
the  requisite  quantity  of  water  into  every  part  of  the  city 
by  gravitation. 

As  this  subject  has  engaged  your  attention  for  a long- 
while,  and  the  details  connected  therewith  have  been  ex- 
tensively discussed,  I shall  confine  my  remarks  to  the 
comparative  merits  of  these  two  projects. 

4 


28 


By  reference  to  the  report  of  Prof.  Silliman  recently 
submitted  to  you,  it  will  be  seen  that  a comparison  of  the 
purity  and  physical  properties  of  the  water  in  Connecticut 
river  at  Hartford,  and  Trout  Brook,  would  indicate  no 
preference  between  them  for  all  practical  purposes  ; both 
waters  being  remarkably  pure. 

From  personal  examination  of  the  proposed  site  for  the 
reservoir  on  Trout  Brook,  I have  no  hesitation  in  saying, 
that  the  grounds  are  better  adapted  for  keeping  stored 
water  in  a pure  state  than  those  of  any  large  reservoir  I 
know  of.  Care  must  be  taken  to  thoroughly  clean  the 
bottom  and  sides  of  the  reservoir,  and  especially  should 
no  vegetation  be  allowed  at  the  water  line  ; for  this  pur- 
pose I have  estimated  an  expenditure  of  $5000,  and  with 
so  liberal  an  outlay,  I have  no  doubt  the  retained  water 
would  remain  pure.  The  water  supply  of  the  Brooklyn 
City  works,  is  collected  in  a series  of  reservoirs  construct- 
ed as  this  is  proposed  to  be,  but  with  the  disadvantage  of 
less  average  depth,  and  the  water  is  remarkably  fine. 

As  to  the  natural  flow  of  water  in  Trout  Brook,  the 
frequent  gaugings  and  measurements  kept  by  your  engi- 
neer for  upwards  of  a year,  leave  not  a shadow  of  doubt 
as  to  the  sufficiency  of  supply  ; these  gaugings  give  a min- 
imum flow  of  500,000  gallons  in  twenty-four  hours,  after 
a drouth  of  near  six  weeks  duration,  and  a daily  average 
for  the  year  of  over  6,000,000  gallons  ; and  my  own  ob- 
servation of  the  capacity  of  the  stream  made  at  three  dif- 
ferent times,  satisfy  me  that  this  estimate  is  not  too  large  ; 
and  that  the  supply  would  be  equal  to  the  demands  of  a 
population  of  100,000. 

Thus  the  chemical  properties  and  the  reliability  of  sup- 
ply being  about  equal  in  the  two  projects,  the  question  of 
preference  should  be  decided  by  the  comparative  cost  of 
the  two. 

The  great  draft  upon  the  distributing  pipes  in  large 
cities,  reduces  materially  the  effectual  head  on  the  distri- 


2§ 


bution— so  that,  at  points  lower  than  the  ievel  of  watei* 
in  the  reservoir,  no  water  can  be  obtained  when  the  draft 
is  large  below  them.  This  maybe  observed  daily  in  New 
York  city,  where  it  is  a cause  of  great  complaint,  and  also 
in  your  own  city,  especially  on  high  portions,  as  at  the 
Retreat  for  the  Insane,*  where,  with  a head  of  twelve  feet, 
no  water  can  be  obtained  from  the  pipes,  when  the  low 
portions  of  the  city  are  drawing  largely. 

For  this  reason,  as  well  as  to  provide  a sufficient  head 
for  the  highest  portions  of  the  city,  Zion’s  Hill  has  been 
proposed  for  the  site  of  a new  reservoir.  The  surface  of 
water  in  this  reservoir  would  be  one  hundred  and  seventy- 
five  feet  above  the  river,  and  seventy-five  feet  below  the 
surface  of  water  in  the  proposed  reservoir  at  West  Hartford, 
and  fifty  feet  higher  than  your  present  reservoir.  This 
reservoir  should  be  so  constructed,  that  with  a depth  of 
eighteen  feet,  it  will  contain  at  least  20,000,000  gallons, 
or  ten  days  supply ; it  will  occupy  between  six  and  seven 
acres  of  ground,  and  should  have  two  compartments,  so 
that  when  the  water  of  the  river  is  in  a turbid  state,  time 
for  settling  may  be  allowed,  before  it  is  distributed  to  the 
city  ; such  a division  too,  will  enable  you  to  keep  the 
reservoir  in  a cleanly  condition,  a most  important  mat- 
ter. 

Should  you  conclude  to  adopt  the  plan  for  bringing  the 
water  from  Trout  Brook  by  gravitation,  I do  not  consider 
a distributing  reservoir  essential,  because  your  storing 
reservoir  of  twenty-five  acres  on  Trout  Brook,  to  contain 
121,000,000  of  gallons,  would  be  but  five  miles  distant, 
and  reservoirs  so  located  have  proved  sufficient  for  other 
places.  The  new  receiving  and  distributing  reservoir  now 
under  construction  at  Central  Park  in  New  York  city,  is 
more  than  five  miles  from  the  City  Hall,  and  became  ne- 
cessary in  consequence  of  the  insufficiency  of  the  present 

* It  is  seldom  that  water  can  be  drawn  at  this  point,  except  at  night,  even 
with  a full  reservoir. — Commissioners. 


80 


one  at  forty-second  street,  which  has  a capacity  of  less 
than  one  day’s  supply  for  the  city. 

All  that  you  would  provide  against  by  a distributing 
reservoir  in  the  city,  would  be  the  remote  contingency  of 
a failure  in  the  main  pipe. 

Should  you  deem  it  advisable  to  provide  for  such  a con- 
tingency, a reservoir  of  sufficient  capacity,  say  4,000,000 
gallons,  near  Vanderbilt’s,  two  miles  from  the  State  House, 
and  three  miles  from  the  Trout  Brook  reservoir,  can  be 
built  for  118,708,  which  includes  the  connections  and  cost 
of  site — two  and  a half  acres. 

The  calculations  for  the  delivery  of  water,  taken  from 
Trout  Book  by  a sixteen  inch  main,  are  based  upon  the 
well  known  formula  of  Eytelweyne,  viz. : 

^/'D  x ^>0  x II  _ veiocity  per  second ; in  which  D 

v L + (D  X 50)  J ^ ’ 

represents  the  diameter  of  pipe,  H the  head  of  water,  and 
L the  length  of  pipe. 

At  the  proposed  reservoir  near  Vanderbilt’s,  one  hundred 
and  ninety  feet  above  the  river,  and  sixty  feet  below  the 
Trout  Brook  reservoir,  and  16,000  feet  from  it,  the  delivery 
would  be  8,182,000  gallons  of  281  cubic  inches  in  twenty- 
four  hours.  At  the  river  in  Hartford,  estimating  the  main 
26,400  feet  long,  the  delivery  would  be  5,062,264  gallons, 
and  at  a point  in  the  city  ninety  feet  above  the  river,  the 
delivery  would  be  4,049,741  gallons,  and  at  one  hundred 
and  twenty-five  feet  above  the  river,  the  height  of  your 
present  reservoir,  the  delivery  would  be  3,579,700  gallons 
in  twenty-four  hours. 

In  order  to  procure  the  requisite  supply  of  2,000,000 
per  day,  by  pumping,  your  present  facilities  must  be  ma- 
terially increased,  either  by  an  alteration  of  your  present 
machinery,  the  constructing  of  a new  engine  and  pumps 
of  sufficient  capacity,  or  by  both,  and  as  the  risk  of  failure 
to  which  all  machinery  is  liable,  should  be  as  far  as  possi- 
ble avoided,  particularly  in  so  vital  a matter  as  the  water 
supply  for  a city  of  the  present  and  prospective  population 


31 


of  Hartford,  I would  recommend  you,  not  only  to  altel* 
your  present  engine  so  as  to  increase  its  power,  but  also 
to  construct  a new  set  of  machinery,  equal  to  the  above 
mentioned  duty  of  2,000,000  per  day. 

I understand  Messrs.  Woodruff  & Beach  have  recently 
made  you  a proposal  to  this  effect,  to  wit,  for  a total  remu- 
neration of  $33,000, 

1st.  To  alter  the  present  machinery,  so  as  to  make  it 
equal  to  forcing  1,500,000  gallons  into  the  proposed  Zion’s 
Hill  reservoir,  through  a rising  main  of  20  inches  in  diam- 
eter in  12  hours. 

2d.  To  construct  another  engine  and  pumps  of  power 
sufficient  to  force  into  the  same  reservoir  through  a pipe 
of  same  diameter,  2,000,000  gallons  in  12  hours. 

3d.  To  make  all  necessary  alterations  at  the  present 
engine  house  to  accommodate  both  sets  of  machinery. 

Based  upon  this  proposition,  my  estimate  for  cost  of 
proposed  means  of  supply  by  pumping  is  : — 

For  increasing  capacity  of  present  machinery, 
for  new  engine  and  pumps  and  for  alter- 
ations at  engine  house,  as  per  proposition 
of  Messrs.  Woodruff  & Beach,  . $33,000 

For  reservoir  on  Zion’s  Hill  to  contain  20,000,- 

000,  gallons,  ....  38,245 

For  12,800  feet  rising  main,  20  in.  diameter, 

at  $2.75  per  foot,  . . . 35,200 

For  5,700  feet  return  pipe  through  Yernon  St. 
and  Retreat  Avenue,  of  16  in.  diameter, 
at  $2.05  per  foot,  . . . 11,685 

For  1,500  feet  waste  pipe,  12  in.  diameter, 

at  $1.25  per  foot,  . . 2,100 

$120,230 

Less  2,500  feet,  6 in.  distribution  pipe  in  Ver- 
non St.  at  $0.62  per  foot,  substituted  by 
a part  of  the  return  pipe,  . . 1,550 


Total,  $118,680 


To  which  must  be  added  the  annual  cost  of  forcing 

2.000. 000  gallons  per  day,  into  Zion’s  Hill  reservoir. 

I base  so  much  of  this  estimate  as  relates  to  the  cost  of 
fuel,  oil  and  waste,  upon  information  derived  from  the 
report  made  by  the  Water  Commissioners  of  Brooklyn, 
Jan.  1862,  where  I find  that  1,649,172,500  gallons  of  wa- 
ter was  raised  170  feet  through  a main  36  inches  diameter 
and  5,800  feet  long  in  3,082  hours,  by  an  expenditure  of 
4,920,748  lbs.  of  coal,  being  2,984  lbs.  for  each  million  of 
gallons  raised  ; the  cost  of  oil,  waste  and  tallow  for  this  ser- 
vice, being  at  the  rate  of  40  cents  per  million  gallons.  So 
much  of  the  estimate  as  relates  to  wages  of  engineer,  fire- 
man and  laborers,  and  the  repairs  of  machinery,  I base 
upon  the  statement  in  your  report  of  March,  1861,  adding 
thereto  $360  for  additional  labor  of  coaling  and  attending 
to  extra  engine. 

The  duty  requisite  for  your  proposed  improvement  is 

730.000. 000  gallons,  to  be  forced  through  a main  20  in.  in 
diameter  and  12,800  ft.  long,  to  a height  of  175  ft.  in  4,380 
hours,  which  w^ould  require,'  at  above  ratio,  972  tons — of 
2,240  lbs — of  coal,  to  which  should  be  added  12  per  ct., 
equal  to  117  tons,  to  overcome  increased  friction  incident 
to  additional  length  and  decreased  diameter  of  forcing  tube. 

The  annual  cost  of  pumping  will  then  be : — 


For  salary  of  engineer,  firemen  and  laborers,  $2,160 
For  fuel — 1,089  tons  coal — at  $5.25  per  ton,  5,717 
For  oil,  waste  and  tallow,  . . . 292 

For  repairs  to  machinery,  . . .700 


$8,869 

Representing  a capital  of  . . $147,816 

To  which  should  be  added  the  first  cost,  as 

above,  ....  118,680 


Total  cost  by  pumping 


$266,496 


33 


The  estimate  for  cost  of  proposed  means  of  supply  by 
gravitation,  with  a storing  reservoir  on  Trout  Brook  of  25 
acres,  to  contain  121,000,000  gallons,  is, 

For  32,000  cub.  yards  of  earth  in  dam,  at  20  cts.,  $6,400 
“ 2,000  “ “ puddle  wall  “ 50  “ 1,000 

“ Cleaning  and  preparing  site  for  Reservoir,  5,000 
“ Land  and  damages  to  mill  privileges,  <fcc.,  20,000 
“ 26,400  ft.  16  in.  main,  laid  complete,  at  $2.05, 54,120 
“ Gate  chambers,  gates  and  overflow,  <fcc.,  2,500 

$89,020 

To  which  if  distributing  reservoir  be  construct- 
ed near  Vanderbilt’s,  (deemed  unneces- 
sary,) should  be  added  its  cost,  . $13,703 

Total,  $102,723 

The  pipes  for  which  I have  estimated  in  both  projects, 
are  the  wrought  iron  and  cement,  which  are  now  used  in 
your  vicinity,  at  New  Britain,  Danbury,  and  New  Haven, 
and  extensively  elsewhere. 

Should  you  prefer  cast  iron  pipes,  70  cts.  per  foot 
should  be  added  to  the  rates  for  16  inch  pipe,  and  $1.25 
per  foot  to  the  rates  for  20  inch  pipe,  making  an  addition 
to  the  total  cost  in  the  estimate  for  pumping  of  19,990, 
and  in  the  estimate  by  gravitation,  of  19,880. 

By  comparing  these  estimates  for  the  cost  of  the  two 
plans,  it  will  be  seen  that  the  plan  by  Gravitation,  has 
greatly  the  advantage.  I would  therefore  recommend  it 
to  you  for  adoption. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

by  your  obedient  servant, 

McREE  SWIFT, 

Civil  Engineer. 


